Old vs. New Style Cruisers

[carstenb]

Originally Posted by DMF Sailing

But does anyone know any monohull that handles well with 4 to 6 foot chop on your stern at 4 to 6 seconds? If it's not the PS 40, it sure as heck isn't that SO 41. Handling in those conditions is like slalom on any jennie-bennie-bavaria-hanse I've ever skippered.

[As an inveterate coastal cruiser who does most of his cruising in a gulf where those are typical conditions in a stiff northerly, I just change course and go somewhere else. Same thing when it's on the nose. Someone mentioned the inability for a sailing vessel of the modern cruising design to make headway upwind against that kind of chop and I concur. Rather than break my teeth I drop 12 degrees and go somewhere else. I'm curious to know which kind of monohull will allow me to continue on course comfortably in that, as one who happily is bereft of the sticktoitiveness of Smokey's Kitchen]

I'll start with a disclaimer - we sail a Jeanneau 40 foot Sun Fast (normally classified as a racer/cruiser or cruiser/racer if you like). We have so far sailed in excess of 30k nm over the past 6 years on a not yet completed RTW. We have been in virtually every kind of weather imaginable and we have yet to say she is a bad boat.

4-6 foot chop with a 6 second period? We fall off and let the passage take longer. Really bad weather? Heave to.

We've sailed upwind in 30-40 knots for several days on end and been reasonably comfortable (as comfortable as you can be in that in a 40 footer)

As goboatingnow said - buy your boat for the 85% of the time you'll be on her - the 15% are a small portion

[mike_sco]

I think the SO410 is not the right boat for this comparison, I would have chosen a HR40C or at least the HR400 instead. But that’s just my 50p to this discussion. If I would have to chose between two I would definitely chose the PS40.
If I could chose between the HR40C and the PS40 I would tend to take the HR40C, in my age and with my little “disabilities” the electric winches and little helpers are very welcome, also that my wife is disabled and couldn’t manage anymore to run around on deck. A deck hand could do the job but I don’t like having strangers on the boat and most of my “friends” don’t really sail. But like I said, just my 50p…
Lots depends on your own demands, what exactly you want to do with it. Living in it, longer distances or only once a passage? Offshore cruising or really circumnavigation? Comfort (real comfort - not the, in my opinion often to hard cushions, seating but the general safety and comfort), safety and reliability are important. Comfort to me doesn’t mean a nice cosy couch, to me it means the boat is easy to cool and heat up, SAFE and structural able to deal with rough sea and weather and protects me. So taking this in consideration I would chose the PS40 from those two. The SO410 to me is more an offshore cruiser and harbour accommodation or island hopper than a real passage maker.

[Sailing Hanse37]

Always the same discussions… seems people with old boats want to justify they still navigate this sort of old relic yachts
We navigate a Beneteau oceanis 43 and do a lot of offshore, crossed the atlantic, etc… we had all sorts of weather… the boat is simply doing fine, nothing broke, nothing to repair. But hey if you want an old boat, the choice is yours

[Bmorgan562]

Originally Posted by Bowdrie

Apples to oranges.
The Jennie lacks any kind of berth on the port side. She also has a wide-open interior with little to prevent you being thrown around, or much to hang on to while moving around.
She's more of a floating condo, with the placement of "windows" to bring the outside in, no feeling of being able to "cocoon" yourself when you want to hide from what's going on outside.
The PS at least has a settee each side which can double as a sea-berth, and a much better galley for offshore work.
The PS has better crossflow ventilation. The overhead grab rails look nice, but give little real security, you end up being a swinging monkey, but you can hang stuff from them.
When the SHTF you can go below, (operative word "below",) and feel like you are "down in" the boat and have a more "snug" feeling.
The PS rig is much more versatile for open ocean work.
The Jennie will be faster.
The PS looks like a boat to take to sea, the Jennie looks like it would be at home going amongst the islands of the Caribbean.

Well put. I’m drawn to the PS.

[moseriw]

Originally Posted by Sailing Hanse37

Always the same discussions… seems people with old boats want to justify they still navigate this sort of old relic yachts
We navigate a Beneteau oceanis 43 and do a lot of offshore, crossed the atlantic, etc… we had all sorts of weather… the boat is simply doing fine, nothing broke, nothing to repair. But hey if you want an old boat, the choice is yours

What I have has an environmental footprint
What I throw away has an environmental footprint
What I buy has an environmental footprint

SO, buy, buy for natures sake!

Do you really think a hull thickness of 6 mm is better then 25 mm?
Nothing to repair? On a boat? Saying it proofs it - couch potato!

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by moseriw

What I have has an environmental footprint
What I throw away has an environmental footprint
What I buy has an environmental footprint


SO, buy, buy for natures sake!


Do you really think a hull thickness of 6 mm is better then 25 mm?

Who says all old boats have thick hulls and all new boats have thin hulls? There have always been well designed, well built boats as well as poorly built boats available.

[Sailing Hanse37]

Originally Posted by moseriw

What I have has an environmental footprint
What I throw away has an environmental footprint
What I buy has an environmental footprint


SO, buy, buy for natures sake!


Do you really think a hull thickness of 6 mm is better then 25 mm?

Medieval castles have walls of over 1 meter thick, some even 2 metres. When we built our house we fortunately did not try to build the walls as thick.

[moseriw]

Well folks I prefer my Vagabond 47 but I served as Skipper in Croatia an sailed almost all boats available in charter.

You name it and as long as they do serve in charter I say it's scrap. If I gotta proof why my list of claims would exceed 2 x A4 starting from seacocks right out of the home depot and maybe stopping with unseless computers that took me half an our to switch the windlass to on. (I am an IT-Expert working with all kinds of servers)

Yes of course you can get perfect new boats, starting at 40 ft and 800.000 € and yes there were Beneteau's that match - as I said starting from 800.000,--

So better think twice and give an old boat a chance for a new life before you buy scrap at 200.000 €

"quality management will bring quality down too the cheapest scrap as long as the customer is satisfied"

The question is: Is the customer able to check what he is getting? Ah yes blah, my surveyor will tell me... nope because he is in the business and used to confirm the scrap.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by moseriw

Well folks I prefer my Vagabond 47 but I served as Skipper in Croatia an sailed almost all boats available in charter.

You name it and as long as they do serve in charter I say it's scrap. If I gotta proof why my list of claims would exceed 2 x A4 starting from seacocks right out of the home depot and maybe stopping with unseless computers that took me half an our to switch the windlass to on. (I am an IT-Expert working with all kinds of servers)

Yes of course you can get perfect new boats, starting at 40 ft and 800.000 € and yes there were Beneteau's that match - as I said starting from 800.000,--

So better think twice and give an old boat a chance for a new life before you buy scrap at 200.000 €

"quality management will bring quality down too the cheapest scrap as long as the customer is satisfied"

The question is: Is the customer able to check what he is getting? Ah yes blah, my surveyor will tell me... nope because he is in the business and used to confirm the scrap.

Well yeah, if the question is "cheap, crappy new boat vs high quality old boat" that's a bit different than just "new vs old".

[ricwoz]

Originally Posted by Sailing Hanse37

Always the same discussions… seems people with old boats want to justify they still navigate this sort of old relic yachts

We navigate a Beneteau oceanis 43 and do a lot of offshore, crossed the atlantic, etc… we had all sorts of weather… the boat is simply doing fine, nothing broke, nothing to repair. But hey if you want an old boat, the choice is yours

One of the reasons I presented this thread the way I did was to highlight the difference in design philosophies, not the boat age, per se.

Because, you can go our right now and buy a BRAND NEW Pacific Seacraft 40' - so, it's not really a "relic yacht", it's more fairly described as a classic design. Obviously a new boat (whether new or old design) is going to avoid problems of wear-and-tear like corroded tanks, worn out sails, engines needing rebuilds, etc.

Are boats more like guitars (where old designs like the Les Paul and Telecaster are still favored by most players over new designs) or like cars (where few people would take a 10 year old Toyota over a new one - but there is appreciation for antique and vintage cars among collectors, but not as daily drivers). Or, is it somewhat in between.

[Sailorman97]

You have picked 2 boats that are on the extreme end. Slow blue water sailor / Dock Condo. Happiness is in the center not on the extremes for most people.

My feeling is bigger is better if you can afford it. A stout(strong?) boat does not have to be slow.

I drive an Beneteau Idylle 51/1550. A well built strong and safe blue water cruiser that is very fast.

It has a long modified fin that draws 6'4 but is about 12 ft on the cord. Tracks well but without the lack of performance of the PS.

The SO is not going to track well. It has a very short cord on the keel and when it crests the waves it will not like to stay very strait without a lot of work on the part of the helmsman or the autohelm

The B Idylle has lots of hand holds, you can move anywhere in the boat with easy in any condition. The PS will have the same. Both would be very safe boats out in the big waves. Out in big waves you will be thrown around and injured on the SO410. You are likely to lose your teeth on that boat.

Those 2 problems with the SO410 would put it out of contention for me. I also don't like plumb bows. You hit a dock ( I have seen it happen a few times, luckily not me) or a sea-can and you have damage. The reason it needs this plumb bow is because the wide stern is so buoyant that you need to get some floatation up front or it will sit bow down. This is not a good design.

The SO is also going to be pretty hard on the crew with all the slamming around your going to be doing with that shallow canoe body. By the time you get across to the Azores your going to be exhausted. It is a sled which you sit on top of at the back.

The PS is out of contention because it is heavy and slow. This is not a compromise it is a bad design flaw (my opinion only) Will this boat even make 125 miles a day? That said it will be a safe and comfortable boat that when it does finally get you to your destination you will not be completely exhausted.

The Idylle 51 empty weighs about 38k with mast in no sails. It is not slow. It is very fast. There is no reason to have a slow boat just because it has to go out on the blue water. Put enough spar on it so that it can be driven. Sailors have to reduce sail at some point so add in the option to go faster and start to reduce sail earlier.

That said, a PS or SO is better than no boat at all. They make all kinds of boats just like they make all kinds of beer for a reason. People are different and like different things. There are people who will love these boats and who is to say they are wrong.

However there are all kinds of boats out there in the 40 ft range that are a better compromise than the SO410 or the PS40.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by Sailorman97

The PS is out of contention because it is heavy and slow. This is not a compromise it is a bad design flaw (my opinion only) Will this boat even make 125 miles a day? That said it will be a safe and comfortable boat that when it does finally get you to your destination you will not be completely exhausted.

The Pacific Seacraft is slow for a fin keel boat, but it's certainly not old, heavy full keel kind of slow.

[Bowdrie]

Originally Posted by ricwoz

One of the reasons I presented this thread the way I did was to highlight the difference in design philosophies, not the boat age, per se.

It is a difference in philosophies.
The NAs/designers of the "past", (shall we say,) men like Alden/S&S/Alberg/Atkin/Rhodes/Crealock/Garden, and dozens of others, grew-up, matured, and came of age, when cotton sails/manila rope/gas engines, and wood/coal stoves were the norm, and only larger boats had winches.
A time when boats were either for racing or as weekend toys for the rich to take their family day-sailing/short summertime cruises, (L. Francis referred to his 73ft Ticonderoga as a "Gentlemans daysailor".
Due to the constraints of wood, designs had curves/shapes that were not "tortured" in construction, there was a certain gracefulness, an "easy-on-the-eyes", if you will.
So, when fiberglass came along it was only natural that the new material was used with/for the "type" of designs that they were familiar with.
The "New crop" of designers had no such connection to the past, and having the freedom that came with a body of already established knowledge about the strengths/possibilities of fiberglass, they could let their imaginations run-wild, and esoteric/ambiguous/ethereal terms like "Grace/Beauty" could be discarded in favor of "Spacious interiors/Panoramic views/Queen sized beds.
And, huge amounts of money could be saved to satisfy the bean-counters.
Personally, I like fiberglass as a medium of construction, but I abhor the uncanny ability of many designers to use its properties as a cudgel to continually create and re-create ugliness in the name of "Practicality".

[Cynara]

I don't know about the boats listed. We sailed a Hans Christian 34. Bought her in 1977 and sold in 2016.

We were very comfortable in her even in 60+ knots.

[gordonhinds]

I have raced yachts nearly all my long and fortunate life. And have chartered yachts for cruising, mostly production cruisers. We have owned shares in new boats and I grew up having a family 50' timber yacht.

So I bought a fusion of the old vs new a year ago, although it is old (1986). Its a modified Farr 38 built of timber (triple planked Kauri) in Auckland NZ. Its a very pretty yacht with cousins that have done well in the past. A distant relative won the Sydney Hobart race - Piccolo - in 1976.

Our yacht has a step through transom which we love. It has a Vee berth which is cosy but small. Not much storage. A very nice main cabin with a good galley. Volume wise its quite a lot smaller than comparable production boats. finer bow and tucked in transom.

It sails OK. Frankly not as fast as I had hoped but maybe with folding prop it might pick up its skirt more? Very sea kindly motion and super solid.

Fractional rig is great but the furler is dodgy and maybe needs replacing. I have spend a huge amount fixing all types of stuff which I vastly underestimated - mostly hidden stuff like decades of electrical stuff badly installed, weird plumbing, or things that didn't really work - stove, freezer, auto helm.

Plus still a huge amount of maintenance. Deck painting for one. And there is a bit of rot that needs attending to unfortunately in places that are hard to access.

So back to the question. We had a share in a brand new Dufour 390 prior. It was nicely appointed but built using super light materials. It was basically a flimsy caravan. It squeaked on a mooring and twist so doors would randomly open and would slam in any headwind at sea. But very contemporary interior design. Lke an apartment not a yacht.

Before that we had a share in an Oceanis 45, which was a huge boat by comparison to the Farr 38. Very beamy. It sailed well given its volume, but it too slammed and accessing things like the mainsail in its boom bag was very hard. Once it heeled you had to hang on as the distance to the leeward side was a long way with not a lot to stop you if you lost your grip. It too was very lightly built.

Production boats I have found are generally well engineered from a systems point of view. Toilets work, as do holding tanks. You don't have to rebuild build stuff that people have added to them over the years, or re engineer things so they work. But they are more exspensive generally as they are new. And they have basic fit outs as standard.

At some point I might change our boat to a 20 year old production boat which think will be a good compromise, like a Beneteau CC 44. It will have stuff added but hopefully not so bad it will need redoing. They sail Ok. It will have room for things and more than one head so others can stay on board with some privacy.

If you are cruising unless you spend a huge amount (like millions) most mono hull sail Ok not great as they get loaded down with gear and as result become a lot slower. But slowing down is also the gear change to cruising.

The double ender is a sea kindly yacht with a cosy interior that looks great. The Jenneau is a great entertainer and has great access if swimming is your thing (we love that). I suspect is super lightly built and you would wonder what is going to break next. Pick your weather and the Jenneau would be great but a nightmare in a headwind at sea. The double ender would sail on effortlessly in any conditions, and probably be a little slower, but not much). But getting on and off would be a pain as you have to haul yourself over the topsides which is not always that easy.

Horses for courses. Older production boats like Catalinas or Beneteaus or Jenneaus are really good boats.